Search for: "Worth v. No Named Defendant" Results 261 - 280 of 2,525
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Feb 2022, 3:00 am by Jim Sedor
Calk had hoped then-President Trump would name him to a powerful government post, including treasury secretary, defense secretary, or ambassador to France or the United Kingdom. [read post]
2 Feb 2022, 10:15 am by Sam Cohen, Alex Vivona
“goal of defending the rules-based order is not to keep any country down. [read post]
2 Feb 2022, 10:15 am by Sam Cohen, Alex Vivona
“goal of defending the rules-based order is not to keep any country down. [read post]
1 Feb 2022, 1:21 am by Joe Mullin
In this episode, you’ll learn about: The prior art, or evidence, of earlier technology that EFF was able to present to courts to prove that the so-called “podcasting patent” was invalid How the landmark Alice v. [read post]
26 Jan 2022, 11:11 am by Amy Howe
She was poised even when she was being peppered with questions from all sides of the bench, as she was in defending an ultimately unsuccessful position in her first argument, in Begay v. [read post]
18 Jan 2022, 1:55 pm by Kevin LaCroix
The lead plaintiff in the action subsequently filed an amended consolidated complaint (here), which named as defendants the company itself; and its CEO, Chief Technology Officer, and Chief Financial Officer. [read post]
6 Jan 2022, 12:21 am by Eleonora Rosati
The defendants (who had a history of obtaining “opportunistic” registrations of domain names and trade marks) registered LITECOIN as a UK trade mark some years after Litecoin’s launch but before the claimant did. [read post]
3 Jan 2022, 12:39 pm by Kevin LaCroix
And in 20 of the 31 SPAC-related suits (61.7%) the defendants named in the complaint included not only the post-merger company and certain of its officers and directors, but also former directors and officers of the SPAC itself. [read post]
24 Dec 2021, 7:57 am by Kevin LaCroix
Like many of the SPAC-related suits filed in 2021, this complaint names as individual defendants only individuals associated with the operating company and the post-SPAC company; no former directors and officers of the SPAC were named. [read post]